When comparing WMFS2 vs bspwm, the Slant community recommends bspwm for most people. In the question“What are the best window managers for Linux?” bspwm is ranked 9th while WMFS2 is ranked 33rd. The most important reason people chose bspwm is:
It has a low footprint.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Built-in panel
WMFS2 has a status bar built into the desktop. This implies that no extra app is required for users who like to use a panel on their desktop.
Pro Supports tabbed view
WMFS2 has tabs like i3 WM. The bottom tile has three tabs, with only one visible window. Press alt+shift+k (by default) to get a combined tabbed window.
Pro Multiple desktops
WMFS2 utilizes a feature called "tags" which is very similar to virtual desktops. With tags, WMFS2 can display multiple desktops in a singular desktop, as well as separate ones also.
Pro Easy to customize
WMFS2 uses a singular configuration file that is easy to edit and understand.
Pro Good mouse support
Re-sizing and moving tiled windows with the mouse is easy and intuitive.
Pro Very lightweight
It has a low footprint.
Pro Drag&drop / Mouse support for resize/move
You can resize, switch panes, and resize tiles via the mouse.
Pro Very flexible
The keyboard shortcut are handled by another module so it's easy to use other inputs. The configuration is also simple.
Pro Based on binary space partitioning
The windows tiling is handled as the leaves of a full binary tree. This makes it easy to partition as you like.
Pro Open source
Pro Live configuration updates
No need to restart for updating configurations.
Pro Simple, adheres to the UNIX philosophy
Configuration takes much less work than in similar window managers. Hotkey binding is handled by a separate utility, sxhkd.
Pro Simple interface
All actions of the window manager (like opening or resizing a window, changing the workspace, etc.) are handled by a program called bspc, which communicates with bspwm over a socket connection. The config file is just a shell executable making calls to that program. This makes it very easy to write your own scripts to handle bspwm's behavior.
Con Bug with tag numbers on Debian
There is a bug where the tag numbers do not highlight correctly on Debian (though this may get fixed in the future and may not be a problem on other distros).
Con Poorly documented
Compared to something like i3 for example, a user following through i3's documentation is basically guaranteed to get a working desktop suited to their needs. Setting up bspwm is much more of a headache due to developers assuming things are clearer than they are.
Con Lacks transparency support
Like most window managers there is no built in compositing, which means no transparencies.